MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2887543953 · doi:10.7202/1048916ar

Trois historiens de la « transition ». Mutations identitaires et historiographie en Acadie, en Ontario français et au Manitoba français, 1970-2000

2018· article· fr· W2887543953 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Yves Frénette

Bibliographic record

VenueCahiers Charlevoix Études franco-ontariennes · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Saint-Boniface
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Yves Frenette , qui en est à sa cinquième participation aux Cahiers Charlevoix, propose un regard comparatif de l’historiographie dans trois aires de la francophonie canadienne entre 1970 et 2000. Au cours de cette période de transition , les identités traditionnelles acadienne et canadienne-française déclinent progressivement au profit de nouvelles identités francophones provincialisées. Il s’attache à trois historiens qui sont aussi des intellectuels enracinés dans leur milieu : Léon Thériault au Nouveau-Brunswick, Gaétan Gervais en Ontario et Robert Painchaud au Manitoba. Les deux premiers se rejoignent dans leur quête d’autonomie pour les Acadiens et les Franco-Ontariens – autonomie politique pour Thériault, autonomie institutionnelle pour Gervais ; i ls font ressortir des filiations qui, seules, garantissent un avenir établi sur des assises solides. Dans un contexte fort différent, surtout en raison de la situation très minoritaire des francophones de la Prairie, Painchaud étudie la thématique historique de l’immigration, prône l’ouverture à l’autre et appuie les nouvelles politiques fédérales et provinciales de multiculturalisme.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.611

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0140.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCahiers Charlevoix Études franco-ontariennesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207